From: PFC <lists@peufeu.com>
To: Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Postgres Benchmark Results
Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 12:10:03 +0200
Message-ID: <op.tsp3u1becigqcu@apollo13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87hcq5l1c7.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com>
References: <op.tsmrv71ecigqcu@apollo13>
<87hcq5l1c7.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com>
> Note that while the average hits/s between 100 and 500 is over 600 tps
> for
> Postgres there is a consistent smattering of plot points spread all the
> way
> down to 200 tps, well below the 400-500 tps that MySQL is getting.
Yes, these are due to checkpointing, mostly.
Also, note that a real forum would not insert 100 posts/s, so it would
not feel this effect. But in order to finish the benchmark in a correct
amount of time, we have to push on the inserts.
> Some of those are undoubtedly caused by things like checkpoints and
> vacuum
> runs. Hopefully the improvements that are already in the pipeline will
> reduce
> them.
I am re-running it with other tuning, notably cost-based vacuum delay and
less frequent checkpoints, and it is a *lot* smoother.
These take a full night to run, so I'll post more results when I have
usefull stuff to show.
This has proven to be a very interesting trip to benchmarkland...
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: lists@peufeu.com, stark@enterprisedb.com
Subject: Re: Postgres Benchmark Results
In-Reply-To: <op.tsp3u1becigqcu@apollo13>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox